As the very final vote on the European Copyright Directive gets ever
closer, music industry campaigners have sent an open letter to YouTube
boss Susan Wojcicki. In it they suggest that – given her company is so
keen on freedom of expression – she should deliver the music community’s
position on the incoming copyright reforms to all the YouTube users who
have had the Google position pushed into their apps in recent months.

Opponents to the Copyright Directive – and especially to the
music-industry-supported safe-harbour-reforming article thirteen – often
cite free speech concerns when criticising the new liabilities the
copyright reforms will put on platforms like YouTube.

The music industry has long argued that those concerns are not
justified. In the new letter, the Europe For Creators campaign group
goes one step further by stating that, if Google is really concerned
about free speech, it would surely want its users to hear both sides of
the argument around the directive.

Google and YouTube, of course, went into campaigning overdrive
on article thirteen late last year. They dropped their previous strategy
of back-room lobbying and allowing supposedly grass roots groups to
lead the public facing communications, and instead pushed out messaging
directly to consumers.

In its letter to Wojcicki, the Europe For Creators campaign –
which is led by GESAC and backed by various music industry organisations
– writes: “You have taken advantage of your considerable influence over
1.8 billion monthly users as the biggest media entity in the world to
circulate your own message to video makers and YouTubers”.

And also to YouTube’s users, of course, via “a portal
comprising all videos defending your position… [and by running]
banners, pop-ups and push notifications on YouTube defending your point
of view and directing traffic to your unique YouTube.com webpage”.

“This is unprecedented and raises ethical questions”, the
letter goes on, before accusing the web giant of including misleading
statements in all that communication that constituted “scaremongering”.
It then states: “We believe it is totally unfair and unacceptable that
your service, which dominates the online market, is exclusively used as a
media service to promote your own commercial interests in a debate over
European legislation”.

“You advocate freedom of expression”, the letter then says,
“but what we have seen is a media service dedicated to the promotion of
its own views, based on false information and scare tactics. We believe
in pluralism and open, democratic debate. We believe our views also need
to be voiced to your audience. That is what freedom of speech is all
about. This is why we are asking you to let us … send a message to the
same YouTubers so we can share with them our vision of article
thirteen”.

Although the short-term objectives of the letter are obvious,
interestingly the concerns it raises feed into the next big web-related
debate in the EU once all the current copyright matters are addressed.

And that is platform responsibility, a debate that includes
concerns over the ability of tech giants to exploit their platforms to
their own commercial advantage. Which in turn includes the kind of
anti-competitive tactics Spotify accuses Apple of employing, but also
the exploiting of platforms to skew political debate, as YouTube is
accused of in this letter.